by Elsewhere 109 Replies latest jw friends
LOL.
Most environmentalists are not fighting for a win/win. They are fighting to force their agenda down our throats like any other shallow thinking control group. Their fondness for junk science and shallow thought reminds me of the JWs. A whole lot of emotion, a whole little thought process.
Why the disdain for environmentalists? Everyone has an agenda - based on values. The question is what's more important?
You paint with broad brushes, SWALKER. Why don't you tell us where you are from so we can stereotype you as well?
I, for one, "believe in" global warming. It's happened before, it will happen again. As someone else mentioned, at the core of the debate, as I see it, is not whether global warming is occurring (though that is debateable in some circles), but what is causing it.
Environmentalists like to place humans upon some sort of messed up pedestal, making humans such a primary cause, when the facts just don't really support it. (Sorry, nothing to back this up with at the moment, other than to say I've gathered this from various studies.)
Now, I do believe that we do need to do more to conserve energy, and/or to find alternative fuels... absolutely. And I really would like to be able to breathe clean air in our cities, which is where so much of the pollution is concentrated. I just have not seen evidence that convinces me that we are a major contributor to any global warming trend that is occurring.
Working to reduce human impact on the earth is as pure WIN/WIN as anything on this planet could possibly be.
When people are fighting against win/win, you know you have BELIEF problems to deal with.
I know what my beliefs are, maybe you can show me where they are wrong.
We have been cognitively aware of our relationship to the earth for less than 1/10 of a geologic age second. How could we possibly be smart enough to know which course of action will be better or worse for the earth over the long haul?
The reason I ask is because I believe I would have to be convinced that I knew for sure what was good for the earth before I would be in favor of making policies to enforce that earth medicine on others. In other words, prove that our choices will create a WIN/WIN and I will buy into your as-yet-unproven beliefs.
When people have to market a concept there is no hard data ("science") that clearly supports their viewpoint. Calling a course of action win/win isn't proof that it is win/win. You stated a contrary belief and that is all you did. Proof is made of sterner stuff.
Here's an easy science ("hard data") question for you: By what percentage did the total volume of earth's "greenhouse gasses" increase or decrease within the last five years. I mean, they are tracking this somehow, right? This should be an easy one, because we all KNOW that greenhouse gasses are increasing...so, what is the total volume of earth's atmospheric greenhouse gasses in 2000 versus total volume in 2005?
If they are going by emissions in calculating the gasses, they are mistakenly assuming that the earth doesn't have self-correcting mechanisms to cope with increased emissions. If you think the volume of gasses emitted from cattle flatulence is bad, what about DINO farts?
AuldSoul
You paint with broad brushes, SWALKER. Why don't you tell us where you are from so we can stereotype you as well?
Daystar...I didn't realize that you were from Texas or I never would have said anything! LOL!!! I have a lot of friends that live in or are from Texas...my best friend is from there and here are her exact words a year ago..."I want to get to Hell out of Texas!!!" I think it was in-law problems, not living there! I like Texas...love Austin, San Antonio, Dallas...and I love the food!!! Here's a clue for you...when I'm in Texas, everyone thinks I'm a native because of my accent! Southern born and bred...just not a republican, coon hunting, gun toting southerner!
Swalker (I do love dogs though!)
Most environmentalists are not fighting for a win/win. They are fighting to force their agenda down our throats like any other shallow thinking control group. Their fondness for junk science and shallow thought reminds me of the JWs. A whole lot of emotion, a whole little thought process.
Is that chief scientist guy for NASA that went on 60 Minutes a shallow thinking, junk science lover?
Be fair! Greater minds than mine or yours have studied the evidence and honestly believe that GW is a serious problem.
Just say no to sneering naysayers.
I wonder what he means by "environmentalists". I worry about global warming but that doesn't mean I try to fight for anything or try to ram things down people's throats. Nor does it mean I stick my head in the sand and pretend everything is ok.
"I worry about global warming "
Why exactly? I'm genuinely curious. Do you realize it's been happening since the last ice age?
Why exactly?
Well, I don't claim to know everything about it. But regardless of all the facts and figures, what I don't like the way we put various substances into the atmosphere in huge quantities just like a scientist might put things into a test tube or fish tank to work out what will happen to the life forms. This experiment is called our atmosphere, and our children are the lab rats. The eco-system is a hugely complex system that no one fully understands. No one fully understands why the planet Mars once had a thicker atmosphere and a watery surface and is now burnt to a crisp with a gaseous thin atmosphere.
Ballistic, I'm in the same boat as you. I don't pretend to have a great understanding of global climatology and meteorology. Those are highly specialized fields. But, I know that many people who are very knowledgeable in these highly specialized fields are concerned about GW.
And that's why the absolute certainty that many GW-naysayers seem to have comes off to me as being just so much arrogance.
